Sexual Fluidity
Documents population-level fluidity, supporting therapeutic exploration.
Lilly, K. J., et al. (2024). Fixed or fluid? Sexual identity fluidity in a large national panel study of New Zealand adults. The Journal of Sex Research, 61(9), 1351–1366. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2023.2289517
Summary: Longitudinal data show stability for most but fluidity for some across waves.
Common misrepresentation: Proves universal fluidity/choice or mere error.
What it actually shows: Heterogeneity allows some to explore fluidity therapeutically, though most remain stable without change.
Storms, M. D. (1980). Theories of sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(5), 783–792. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.5.783
Summary: Proposes a two-dimensional model of sexual orientation (heterosexual–homosexual and asexual–sexual) that challenges simple one-axis, categorical views.
Common misrepresentation: Used as if it were a definitive map of all sexual orientations today or as proof that categories like “gay” and “straight” are meaningless.
What it actually shows: An influential theoretical model that broadened how researchers conceptualize orientation, without claiming to capture all possible identities or trajectories.
Vrangalova, Z., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (2012). Mostly heterosexual and mostly gay/lesbian: Evidence for new sexual orientation identities. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9921-y
Summary: Documents that “mostly heterosexual” and “mostly gay/lesbian” self-identifications are common and associated with distinct patterns of attraction and behavior.
Common misrepresentation: Used either to deny that stable gay/lesbian orientations exist or to argue that everyone is essentially bisexual.
What it actually shows: Population-level evidence that many people occupy nuanced, intermediate positions on attraction spectra, complicating strictly binary categorizations.
Dickenson, J., Diamond, L., King, J., Jenson, K., & Anderson, J. (2020). Understanding heterosexual women’s erotic flexibility: The role of attention in sexual evaluations and neural responses to sexual stimuli. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 15(10), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsaa058
Summary: Examines how attentional processes are linked to heterosexual women’s erotic flexibility, including behavioral ratings and neural responses to sexual stimuli.
Common misrepresentation: Claimed to prove that women’s sexual orientation is purely a matter of choice or social influence.
What it actually shows: Evidence that attention and context shape erotic responses in meaningful ways, while not asserting that orientation is infinitely malleable or voluntary.
Mustanski, B., Kuper, L., & Greene, G. (2014). Development of sexual orientation and identity. In D. L. Tolman & L. M. Diamond (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 609–610). American Psychological Association.
Summary: Reviews developmental research indicating that sexual attractions and identities typically emerge over time through complex interactions of biological, psychological, and social factors.
Common misrepresentation: Simplified into the claim that orientation is either wholly fixed at birth or entirely socially constructed.
What it actually shows: A nuanced account of development that recognizes both stability and variability and resists oversimplified “born this way” versus “choice” dichotomies.
Pela, C., & Sutton, P. M. (2021). Sexual attraction fluidity and well-being in men: A therapeutic outcome study. Journal of Human Sexuality, 12, 61–86.
https://www.reintegrativetherapy.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/JHS-PelaSutton.pdf
Summary: Documents reductions in same-sex attraction and well-being improvements in 40 men over 2+ years of SAFE therapy.
Common misrepresentation: Rejected as lacking controls or proving common/permanent change.
What it actually shows: Some clients report fluidity shifts and reduced distress via value-aligned exploration, without guarantees for all.
Two Prisms. (n.d.). Sex, gender, and identity research archive.
https://www.twoprisms.com/
Summary: Provides annotated scientific literature summaries.
Common misrepresentation: Labeled as ideological.
What it actually shows: Primary-source documentation with methodological notes.
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on Unsplash
